22-Apr-2024 03:03 GMT.
[Rant] AmiJoe / Met@BoxANN.lu
Posted on 19-May-2000 07:17 GMT by Christian Kemp56 comments
View flat
View list
Cybes writes: In an attempt to gain further information regarding the release date of the AmiJoe I have been in contact with a variety of places. Read more below. Blittersoft UK informed me that the units were ready and waiting on Haage & Partner (presumably for a license for the PPC 68k emulator+warpup). Bill Mc Ewen mentioned in a speech a short while back that they were working though with Met@box to lower the cost of the Amijoes to be around the 250$us or so mark by using as many standardized parts as possible. This still left the question of when it would come out so i then contacted met@box themselves, in which their international rep ("Susan") replied: "Please keep an eye on the website. I have no further info at present". Does anyone know anything more on this matter regarding its release?
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Han van Gelderen18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 2Ben Hermans/Hyperion18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 3Jaeson Koszarsky18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 4Henrik Mikael Kristensen18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 5Dimitris Panokostas18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 6George Kaliviotis18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 7Nick18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 8Matt Wakeling18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 9www.emrl.com18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 10Eric18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 11Ryan E. A. Czerwinski18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 12Ben Hermans/Hyperion18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 13Mike18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 14Anonymous18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 15XDelusion18-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 16XDelusion19-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 17Cybes19-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 18MagicSN19-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 19Neil20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 20PezWiz20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 21Ben Hermans/Hyperion20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 22Paul20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 23George Kaliviotis20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 24Anonymous20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 25sutro20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 26Andrew Korn20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 27Ben Hermans/Hyperion20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 28Elwood20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 29James20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 30sutro20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 31Ben Hermans/Hyperion20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 32Mark Olsen20-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 33Andrew Korn21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 34damocles21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 35George Kaliviotis21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
AmiJoe / Met@Box : Comment 36 of 56ANN.lu
Posted by Steffen Haeuser on 21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (James):
--- snip ---
No disrespect intended, but If thats so regarding Hyperion knowing all they do then why
did you seem to know nothing about a 68k emulator which met@box themselves talked
--- snap ---
Hyperion *did* know about this. I was present at the meeting between Hyperion,
M@tabox and H&P in November, when they told about this stuff. It was also clear
though that they did not have anything RUNNING. As to my impression from that
meeting it was that the bosses of M@tabox were thinking
"When we do a G3 Card for the Mac we don't need any external guys doing a 68k
Emulation... so why should we be dependent on external developers for an Amiga
Card ? The OS has to provide compatibility."
At the meeting Hyperion (Ben Hermans) never believed they actually had coded
only a single line of this "own Emulation", but that it was only a negociation
trick ("Hey, if you do not do this Emulation for free, we will do our own
Emulation"). I think this is at least very close to the truth.
As Hyperion knew that there was *no chance* they could
support a third PPC Kernel, they were of course interested that this does
not get public information (Hyperion was absolutely sure that this talk
about "own Emulation" was only a negociation ploy and that if this trickery
does not lead anywhere they HAVE to license the 68k Emulation sooner or later).
After the "We will do our own Emulation" threat failed, they tried "If the
Emulation does not come for free, we will sell the Boards with Linux". But
this was dropped also, and then negociations restarted luckily. But of course
all that crap caused delays.
The biggest problem appearently always was their "on the Mac we do not need
this" argument. The bosses of M@tabox are essentially Mac-guys...
In the meanwhile the negociations SHOULD be successfully finished (though
I have no information on the current situation). The hardware AFAIK is
not completely finished, though near-working Prototypes AFAIK exist
since the November-show.
Steffen Haeuser
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 37Sinan Gurkan21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 38Sinan Gurkan21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 39Mark Olsen21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 40Remco Komduur21-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 41JOEL EHRET22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 42Ralph Schmidt22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 43Ben Hermans/Hyperion22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 44Ralph Schmidt22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 45E hilton22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 46redrumloa22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 47George Kaliviotis22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 48Ben Hermans/Hyperion22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 49Remco Komduur22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 50George Kaliviotis22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 51Mark Olsen22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 52Ralph Schmidt22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 53Ralph Schmidt22-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 54MagicSN23-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 55Juan Carlos Marcos28-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Comment 56anthony28-May-2000 22:00 GMT
Back to Top